Batoning

[ocnLogan]

That last little bit about thinner and being just as strong being able to slice. Any task requiring slicing in a survival, woodscrafting and the likes situation will not be master chef grade slicing. My thickest of knives can do the thinnest of slicing, you've seen it. I fully convexed my full flat grind falcon and I can lay it on the surface of anything and make extremely thin slices of anything after batoning enough wood to burn several hours. It's extremely easy to maintain in the field too with improvised methods, easier than 1095 and the edge lasts as long. Thinning out a blade too much will have a constant negative, mass. You shed mass you will need to do other tasks. So thin may be as tough in another steel but you just paid Peter by robbing Paul. Only thing I see a tougher steel being better in is a puukko or small blade where mass is not a characteristic needed to do work it's intended to. At that point all you get is more toughness, it still won't do what the lesser steel can't. You might also make a requirement to carry extra tools to maintain it, robbing Peter to a pay Paul this time there will always be a trade off. If I got a large blade 3V chopper baton duty blade I would not get a thinner one, the mass is needed to do that job, a carbon steel blade will last two days doing heavy work so why put a better steel in a large chopping splitting blade? You still need that mass.

I see what your getting at, I just see it different. Put the 3V in a smaller blade and make it tougher for its already designed thickness. I don't see it working the other way around thinning out a large blade needed for brute force.

To some extent I agree with what you're saying. Most of what I said does apply to smaller knives (if we're talking overall thickness). Like you said, thinking out a larger knife would reduce chopping power, etc. And thicker knives to act more like a wedge, this is true. So if that is an important design feature, that might not be a good idea.

The other thing that the fancy steels "should" let you do is run the edge thinner, or support a more acute edge angle while retaining the same edge stability.

Anyway, I was more trying to convey was my preferences on what id like a knife that was designed for general outdoors use to be capable of, than bring up too much about "super" steels, my bad.

Carry on .

 

[Boris74]

To some extent I agree with what you're saying. Most of what I said does apply to smaller knives (if we're talking overall thickness). Like you said, thinking out a larger knife would reduce chopping power, etc. And thicker knives to act more like a wedge, this is true. So if that is an important design feature, that might not be a good idea.

The other thing that the fancy steels "should" let you do is run the edge thinner, or support a more acute edge angle while retaining the same edge stability.

Anyway, I was more trying to convey was my preferences on what id like a knife that was designed for general outdoors use to be capable of, than bring up too much about "super" steels, my bad.

Carry on .

You always add constructive information so keep adding info! I can see where a blade like my falcon could be just as good thinner overall with a thinner just as tough edge. While it does chop decent for its size at under 4" blade length, it weighs a whooping 10oz. I only tested it chopping to test edge toughness. Did pretty good only because of the weight. I don't see it doing chop duty so mass wouldn't be an issue. I use it like a puukko on steroids though and it does extremely well in that role for me. It slices and splits just fine. I even pried out chunks of fat wood from a stump with it after beating it into it with a baton. I would love to see a clone of the falcon in a just as tough thinner blade steel. It would be a great mix of what you and I have said.

 

[Cobalt]

Guess I should have been more specific. " I was referring to edge tools used by natives in ways that we would colloquially apply the term "knife". Given that they didn't have modern steels being discussed in this thread.

Although your "archeological evidence" above from a "collector" that makes profit disturbing Native North American cultural heritage and selling it on his site for profit is a little unsettling. I certainly wouldn't call it credible.

AS for the site and your last comment, not really the point here and irrelevant to the discussion. No one ever said knives or swords have to be made of steel and that is certainly not their definition, otherwise everything from the bronze and copper age would not be a sword or knife. The fact is stone knives are still knives. Natives did not have the ability or knowledge to make steel we all know that. But they had the ability to make spears, hawks and knives from stone and bone. The discussion is about batoning and sharp rocks make great tools for splitting wood. And edge tools that we would apply the term knife to can be made of stone and bone.

 

[dogwood dan]

I seem to be getting confused on chopping vs. batoning. When Batoning the mass of the blade should be irrelevant it is the mass and velocity of the baton the would determine the force applied. Also when batoning a thinner blade will displace less mass there by requiring less force to cut threw something. If a steel like a powder steel can be made into a thinner blade with a hight grind and still with stand the abuse of batoning it would be more efficient at the task would it not? The thinner blade with a hire grind would also be lighter and easer to carry. On a side note it dose not have to be a powder steel I have used a 1/16" O-1 blade to baton a seasoned oak quarter before just to prove that it could be done. In terms of chopping a balance of mass and speed is needed and has a lot to do with chopping vs. splitting. this is why a splitting maul can wight as much as 16 lb.. and has a wedge profile and blunt edge, while a broad axe has a thin light blade and a felling ax is in-between. I have found that as i get older the advantages of a lighter tool moving faster are preferable to a heavy tool moving slower especially if I am going to be using it or carrying it all day.

 

[B34NS]

AS for the site and your last comment, not really the point here and irrelevant to the discussion. No one ever said knives or swords have to be made of steel and that is certainly not their definition, otherwise everything from the bronze and copper age would not be a sword or knife. The fact is stone knives are still knives. Natives did not have the ability or knowledge to make steel we all know that. But they had the ability to make spears, hawks and knives from stone and bone. The discussion is about batoning and sharp rocks make great tools for splitting wood. And edge tools that we would apply the term knife to can be made of stone and bone.

So you think Native peoples in North America used their flint/obsidian/chert/bone edge tools to baton through wood?!

I'll get to your "source" in minute, thought I'd let you answer that one first

 

[Cobalt]

So you think Native peoples in North America used their flint/obsidian/chert/bone edge tools to baton through wood?!

I'll get to your "source" in minute, thought I'd let you answer that one first

I wasn't there, so I would not know.

As for the source, once again, you are trying to imply that native americans did not have flint and bone knives? Really? Go to the american indian museum in DC, take a look at their tools there. Very interesting.

 

[Boris74]

I seem to be getting confused on chopping vs. batoning. When Batoning the mass of the blade should be irrelevant it is the mass and velocity of the baton the would determine the force applied. Also when batoning a thinner blade will displace less mass there by requiring less force to cut threw something. If a steel like a powder steel can be made into a thinner blade with a hight grind and still with stand the abuse of batoning it would be more efficient at the task would it not? The thinner blade with a hire grind would also be lighter and easer to carry. On a side note it dose not have to be a powder steel I have used a 1/16" O-1 blade to baton a seasoned oak quarter before just to prove that it could be done. In terms of chopping a balance of mass and speed is needed and has a lot to do with chopping vs. splitting. this is why a splitting maul can wight as much as 16 lb.. and has a wedge profile and blunt edge, while a broad axe has a thin light blade and a felling ax is in-between. I have found that as i get older the advantages of a lighter tool moving faster are preferable to a heavy tool moving slower especially if I am going to be using it or carrying it all day.

In batoning mass will always add volume. When you are splitting and get past the edge, which happens rather quickly, and reach the thickest point of the blade it wedges the wood out. A thicker, more mass blade by default will wedge out better. You can baton 1/8 the distance of a log and let it sit there, you can hear the fibers popping apart. Thicker blades wedge out much more quickly. Wait long enough and it takes little more force to split it completely. That pretty much answers the powder steel thinner blade question of yours. I'm not sitting here thinking about the answer either. I know people hate it here, but in my experience thicker blades split easier and faster, steel superiority will be inane.

I've batoned wood with every blade I own, even my Ti necker because a book expert friend declared it would bend before it even cut into the end. It's only 1/16" thick too. It might be on the softer side of the HRC scale but it is extremely tough. . It's stiff and springy.

Another reason thick heavy blades for splitting use are desired is because they will also be used for chopping duties, so that extra mass the thick blade provides comes in handy for chopping. Otherwise you'd need another tool added to the mix for chopping and one super steel thin baton blade. After a couple hikes you'll realize you don't use one and use the other for both and leave the unused tool back home when you SP, and the superior steel won't be the one you pack unless it's the thicker more mass blade.

 

[r redden]

Yup, we use the right rocks, no problems.

Son got sick 20 minutes before SP so no trip out back tonight. At least it wasn't a planed far away trip. I thought he'd had enough earlier this week. He's already talking about when he gets better. So glad my boy likes doing the things I like doing. At least all out knives are as sharp as they can get, so that's a positive.

Spend as much time as you can with your son someday those wil be your best memories. My son is 40 now and I am really glad we spent so much time hunting, fishing, hiking and camping together when he was young because when they get those drivers license and a truck/car their gone. In my 60 years as an avid outdoorsman I have never batoned a knife. I always carried a cleaver strapped to my pack along with a small fixed blade skinner and a Case Stockman or something similar and they were all I needed from prepping firewood to cleaning fish to quartering White Tail. Flat side of the cleaver also works well for driving tent stakes and the weight of these three cutting tools were never an issue.

 

[ocnLogan]

As a very recent father (got home from the hospital 2 days ago), its good to hear people talk well about their time with their kids outside .

And out of curiosity, what did you use the cleaver for? I don't think I've ever seen one used as an outdoors tool (which could just be my own inexperience :/).

 

[r redden]

I have an old thick mean heavy cleaver no name from somewhere back in the 70's. I have used it for splitting wood, making kindling, making tent stakes, driving tent stakes in the ground with the flat side, other hammering duties, heavy food duties, have used it to cook on the flat side eggs, meat and such, clearing small branches from limbs quartering squirrels, rabbits, Turkey's, wild boar, white tails and much more. It is a great tool

 

[ocnLogan]

I have an old thick mean heavy cleaver no name from somewhere back in the 70's. I have used it for splitting wood, making kindling, making tent stakes, driving tent stakes in the ground with the flat side, other hammering duties, heavy food duties, have used it to cook on the flat side eggs, meat and such, clearing small branches from limbs quartering squirrels, rabbits, Turkey's, wild boar, white tails and much more. It is a great tool

Good to know .

That's basically exactly how I use my BK9 (except I don't cook food on it, I'm worried that would affect the HT). A good stout fixed blade can be very handy around camp.

 

[B34NS]

I wasn't there, so I would not know.

As for the source, once again, you are trying to imply that native americans did not have flint and bone knives? Really? Go to the american indian museum in DC, take a look at their tools there. Very interesting.

guess I should have said that natives here did just fine for thousands of years without the help of alloy tool steels. I'd prefer to call what you are referring to as edge tools instead. Semantics aside, sorry that was confusing for you. Figured that putting up a picture of a flint knife that I took would be enough to squelch that debate, but alas.

Your "source" isn't scientific or credible, he's peddling effigies and other relics without regard to treating these as artifacts, not who I want to be gettng my archeological basis for arguments from. Instead he's eliminating any chance we have to learn from these artifacts like what some of these tools were actually used for, by who, and when. Not to mention the fact that some of the items he sells come from "Bastrop", is suspect as it was joked about on an arrowhead enthusiast forum as an april fools joke.

 

[REVDH]

esee 6. do it. you wont regret it. If I had to put my life on a knife it would be the esee 6.

 

[Revolverrodger]

I baton with my knives regularly with no problem

 

[TinyDog]

esee 6. do it. you wont regret it. If I had to put my life on a knife it would be the esee 6.

If you are not in need of the extra length, the Esee 5 is a much better choice due to its width.

 

[solman]

I did not read the entire thread so pardon me if this has been stated. The OP did not ask about the need for batoning wood but rather, what knife you might choose if you wanted to do this. Having said that I have used my Bark river knife for batoning because I wanted to do it. Granted it wasn't really needed but I choose to do it.
It's true that this is not usually necessary but you never know.
In my many years of camping and backpacking I have always been able to make do without having to do this.
I like the Bark River knives because they stand up to the task and Mike Stewart stands behind them.
There are many different models of varying length handle materials and price point so peruse their website and see what you like.
Just my .02 cent

 

[Cobalt]

guess I should have said that natives here did just fine for thousands of years without the help of alloy tool steels. I'd prefer to call what you are referring to as edge tools instead. Semantics aside, sorry that was confusing for you. Figured that putting up a picture of a flint knife that I took would be enough to squelch that debate, but alas.

Your "source" isn't scientific or credible, he's peddling effigies and other relics without regard to treating these as artifacts, not who I want to be gettng my archeological basis for arguments from. Instead he's eliminating any we have to show what some of these tools were actually used for, by who, and when.

The picture I posted was taken from any source. It would not have made a difference. IT was to make the point that they did have edged tools in the day. Yes, we apparently where making different points. I get your point now. Your implication that they got along fine without batoning for thousands of years. I agree. I thought you had implied that they got along without knives for thousands of years, which of course is not true. As for the second part, I don't disagree with you, but this is happening all over. Not that I like it, but it is what it is. Who knows if the tool is even real. It is quite true that in most forest situations you can get along with ever batoning or chopping for that matter. You can break most branches off by hand and leverage. The reason for doing batoning is almost always to reach drywood in very wet conditions and I know I am stating the obvious here. However, it is a good skill to have.

 

[AR_Freak]

This thread has inspired me to fabricate a self-batoning knife.

You, Sir, win the Interwebz for today!

 

[Boris74]

As a very recent father (got home from the hospital 2 days ago), its good to hear people talk well about their time with their kids outside .

And out of curiosity, what did you use the cleaver for? I don't think I've ever seen one used as an outdoors tool (which could just be my own inexperience :/).

Many good years ahead of you. You'll be up late hangin with the kid plenty for a while to come.

Congratulations. Next thing you know they will be asking for their first knife, then first gun, new gear. It's just as fun to watch them outfit themselves as it is to head out.

 

[r redden]

Good to know .

That's basically exactly how I use my BK9 (except I don't cook food on it, I'm worried that would affect the HT). A good stout fixed blade can be very handy around camp.

I agree you probably could affect the HT that's why I only use it for stuff that only stays on the fire a short time( eggs, meat, fish I've caught pop tarts and such) I live in the south in the mountains so the meat I'm talking about is usually spam. I've never noticed any change to the blade. Probably worse on the blade to grind or belt sand I don't know I'm far from a steel tempering guru or knife guru for that matter but you could throw me out in these old mountains and I would be able to survive.-